Author. Seek help. Now.

...oh well abolish the monarchy
I don't get common people's fascination with royalty and creating stuff like this that sanitizes the ruling class while demonizing the peasant/worker class.

You must have missed the part where the princess acknowledges that her father was a tyrant who made things unbearable for the common people. You also must have missed the part where the princess talks about being depressed and shunned, as many royals who were born with disabilities often were, usually treated pretty horrendously by their own family, because they could not maintain the proper image that was expected of them. Nothing was sanitised here.

You also seem to have missed a lot of real world history, you should read up on that. From the Great Peasants' War, to the Jacobins, to the Bolsheviks, revolting masses sure carried out a lot of atrocities that just as often fell on people who personally did them no harm, including upper class children. It is almost like both sides can be horrendous, I know, shocking. Imagine that, nuance.

Like was I supposed to feel bad or something?

If you are a sociopath that evaluates people solely and exclusively based on which class they belong to, then no, I suppose not.

This from an anthology on the author's pixiv of depressing yuri manga

I read through the other works in the anthology and this is the only one that's really yuri.

The thing is,the ruling class had bad apples,some trully rotten ones,but to then extend the punishment to the close family members,even the extended family,and apparently up to three generations worth of the family,for the actions of one individual?

The revolts were trully barbaric,acted out by working class who saw nothing but blood,even if it was just a little girl who didn't know better at the time.

You can always abolish monarchy,but for the love of peace,do it peacefully through a referendum where the people can democratically choose who they want.

Anemone is not in heat here

y'know

cause her body is cold now

Well, damn...

anemone in heat: viva la revolution

The thing is,the ruling class had bad apples,some trully rotten ones,but to then extend the punishment to the close family members,even the extended family,and apparently up to three generations worth of the family,for the actions of one individual?

The revolts were trully barbaric,acted out by working class who saw nothing but blood,even if it was just a little girl who didn't know better at the time.

The rationale is that because the position of power in a monarchy is heredity, to ensure the end of it, the immediate inheritors must be eliminated. Any surviving possible successor could be made into the standard around which the revolution's enemies will gather. Even harmless dumb kid princes or duchesses, as long as they could be propped on a horse by some manipulators, they are dangerous to the revolution, since the enemies may claim some sort of legitimacy and complicate a lot of things on top of the challenges of managing the country the revolution just grabbed.

You can always abolish monarchy,but for the love of peace,do it peacefully through a referendum where the people can democratically choose who they want.

Oh yeah, and the monarch and the noble class who hold all the land, wealth, laws, privileges, and armies will just simply drop it all once a democratic referendum's result was not in their favour, right. So nice of them to just easily and peacefully hand the kratos over to the demos like that.

What is the truth? I did not understand ni una mierda

Lqtp, pase de estar super confusa a reírme, muchas thank yous xD

The rationale is that because the position of power in a monarchy is heredity, to ensure the end of it, the immediate inheritors must be eliminated. Any surviving possible successor could be made into the standard around which the revolution's enemies will gather. Even harmless dumb kid princes or duchesses, as long as they could be propped on a horse by some manipulators, they are dangerous to the revolution, since the enemies may claim some sort of legitimacy and complicate a lot of things on top of the challenges of managing the country the revolution just grabbed.

That is the rationale, yeah, but at the same time most of the violence that happened in the real world that is closely paralleled by this doujin (the most obvious inspiration being the French Revolution) was only partially orchestrated and was just as often, if not even more often, simply the result of pent-up anger and mob mentality, with the masses taking out their frustrations on anyone they could get their hands on, guilty or innocent. I liked the quote from HBO's Rome, though.

last edited at Feb 24, 2023 7:10AM

This is why we have processes like disinheritence now; less drama.

A maid who doesn't protect her mistress isn't a maid.
Just a worthless existence.

Lmao I was hoping I’d find a political discussion on the ethics of the French Revolution in the comments.

My two cents are that that as an anarchist velvet, bloodless, revolution is the goal, but also to understand that it is not in the ruling class’s interest to allow you to do this. It is in no way my place as to tell a prisoner or starving man to wait till a better time, or a time to vote them out. Kropotkin talks about how the French revolution and the subsequent Paris commune was not lost because of the blood for blood fervor but rather because the common people did not have bread. After all, the goal of any revolution, of any society should be the end to scarcity and well being for all.
Someone brought up a good point about the lineage of the monarchy needing to be severed, and of course a truly enlightened revolution would spare literally everyone, save every life, a practical one understands that that tragedy may be necessary, after all britain’s monarchy exists not just symbolically as a horrible historical injustice but presently, people who live without having to work by nature of their blood, funded by the rest of us, when we all could live that well if they did not exist. Then the propaganda machine they run sells the masses a new opiate of royal drama tabloids.

This is to say it is able to be simultaneously tragic, and even possibly horrifyingly unnecessary to end the life of another human. But also at the same time this mistake does not make the whole revolution riven, it shows we have to be all the more serious about well being for all.

Either way gorgeous work, loved the page of darkness there that made me really feel something

Lol, I'm all for it. Abolish the monarchy.

presently, people who live without having to work by nature of their blood, funded by the rest of us, when we all could live that well if they did not exist.

The first part of this is only correct in the most technical way possible, and the second part is so naive that I can't tell if you are serious or if it is just a cute bit of wordplay.

To elaborate on the first point, yes, technically the lifestyle of the royal family is basically paid for by the State. Realistically, though, it isn't. That's because the royal family owns a huge amount of land, and there is a centuries old agreement in place which allows the State to collect all the proceeds from the land as long as the British royal family remains in power. Because this agreement is entirely voluntary and renewed by each new monarch, ending the monarchy would actually directly drain money from the State (unless something crazy happened like the royal family entirely dissolving their holdings and returning them to the State which seems incredibly unlikely). So the whole "the taxpayers have to pay for the royal family's extravagant lifestyle and it's such a big deal" argument is actually uninformed, since the cost of not having the royal family in power means not getting the free money from their land (which substantially eclipses what their lifestyle costs).

last edited at Feb 24, 2023 11:22AM

when we all could live that well if they did not exist.

Most of the world got rid of monarchs and hereditary classes, yet I can not think of one single solitary example where that led to the commoners living in royal luxury. What always happens is that either new elites replace the old elites (essentially changing nothing), or communists take over and make everyone equally miserable while hoarding power and privileges for the higher-ups within the Party.

...oh well abolish the monarchy
I don't get common people's fascination with royalty and creating stuff like this that sanitizes the ruling class while demonizing the peasant/worker class.

You must have missed the part where the princess acknowledges that her father was a tyrant who made things unbearable for the common people. You also must have missed the part where the princess talks about being depressed and shunned, as many royals who were born with disabilities often were, usually treated pretty horrendously by their own family, because they could not maintain the proper image that was expected of them. Nothing was sanitised here.

You also seem to have missed a lot of real world history, you should read up on that. From the Great Peasants' War, to the Jacobins, to the Bolsheviks, revolting masses sure carried out a lot of atrocities that just as often fell on people who personally did them no harm, including upper class children. It is almost like both sides can be horrendous, I know, shocking. Imagine that, nuance.

Like was I supposed to feel bad or something?

If you are a sociopath that evaluates people solely and exclusively based on which class they belong to, then no, I suppose not.

Glad you said it. I thought about it but I'm already working and that seemed like a losing battle. I liked this short. They managed to do a lot of world-building within a short space--crafted beginning, middle, and end pretty well. The art is also nice.

That is the rationale, yeah, but at the same time most of the violence that happened in the real world that is closely paralleled by this doujin (the most obvious inspiration being the French Revolution) was only partially orchestrated and was just as often, if not even more often, simply the result of pent-up anger and mob mentality, with the masses taking out their frustrations on anyone they could get their hands on, guilty or innocent. I liked the quote from HBO's Rome, though.

Yes, because predictably those kinds of mentalities don't usually attract people with moral dispositions--the reason why that kind of "progress" has nearly always ended up muddled at best no matter from what political spectrum it's come from.

last edited at Feb 24, 2023 11:59AM

when we all could live that well if they did not exist.

Most of the world got rid of monarchs and hereditary classes, yet I can not think of one single solitary example where that led to the commoners living in royal luxury. What always happens is that either new elites replace the old elites (essentially changing nothing), or communists take over and make everyone equally miserable while hoarding power and privileges for the higher-ups within the Party.

We might as well called the latter a redwashed version of the former.

The rationale is that because the position of power in a monarchy is heredity, to ensure the end of it, the immediate inheritors must be eliminated. Any surviving possible successor could be made into the standard around which the revolution's enemies will gather. Even harmless dumb kid princes or duchesses, as long as they could be propped on a horse by some manipulators, they are dangerous to the revolution, since the enemies may claim some sort of legitimacy and complicate a lot of things on top of the challenges of managing the country the revolution just grabbed.

It doesn't fucking work though. France had a Bourbon back on the throne by 1816! Less than a generation after killing the Romanovs, Russia's revolution was so successful that they were governed by... an absolute autocrat engaging in wanton imperialistic cruelty while cutting deals with the actual Nazis. Like, arguing that the ends justify the means works for the CIA, in that they can say that no, no one in power is actually a communist now that the junta is installed, but I'm not sure you can even get that far here.

You know, I liked the anemones better when they were in heat. :-/ Also, the story first made me think it jumps back and forth in time, because the cuts between scenes were so disjointed. Only upon rereading did I understand that the first two pages weren't a flash-forward, or that "you miss your brother" didn't mean the boy was already dead by that point, but merely lost/captured.

last edited at Feb 24, 2023 1:04PM

The rationale is that because the position of power in a monarchy is heredity, to ensure the end of it, the immediate inheritors must be eliminated.

It doesn't fucking work though.

Pretty much, yeah. It is because that rationale is not much of a rationale to begin with, it is instead basically a thin excuse applied retroactively to events which were fuelled by anger, bloodlust, and a thirst for vengeance and violence, in an effort to make those events appear more palatable. You know, "we did not commit horrible deeds because we are horrible people, no, we actually had a rational reason guiding us", that kind of nonsense. Even though most people who actually partook in such atrocities only started seeking these "rational" reasons after the fact.

last edited at Feb 24, 2023 1:17PM

The rationale is that because the position of power in a monarchy is heredity, to ensure the end of it, the immediate inheritors must be eliminated.

It doesn't fucking work though.

Pretty much, yeah. It is because that rationale is not much of a rationale to begin with, it is instead basically a thin excuse applied retroactively to events which were fuelled by anger, bloodlust, and a thirst for vengeance and violence, in an effort to make those events appear more palatable.

It's an honest rationale for a few, sure, but they often forget or disregard the fact that the many who will join their cause based on their violent messaging will not share their same moral and ideological bent. You preach violence--no matter what it's for--you get the kinds of people persuaded by violence and it all falls apart quick or slow.

last edited at Feb 24, 2023 1:17PM

You know, I could see this being the start of a pretty neat series.

The angsty story of the former maid, set a few months after this one, as she tries to keep herself and her brother alive in a country beset by all the turmoil revolution brings (quarreling revolutionary factions, hostile neighbors looking to uphold the ancien regime or fulfill their own ambitions, widespread crime and poverty), all while struggling to cope with her grief over betraying someone dear to her. Then a new girl walks into her life, and the maid starts to feel things she hasn’t in a long time.

Bonus points if the new girl is somehow involved in the politics of the new country (maybe a revolutionary or minor noble who somehow survived the purge), so the story can cut between romance a political intrigue.

Damn...well nothing that the maid could've done honestly but the princess wasn't a bad person hence tradegy.

Even if it was sad I kinda liked it, like the whole thing didn't felt edgy at all, I hope the princess and her maid can reunite in the afterlife

Nono, it was pretty serious, I think it would have make a great politic drama series, and would have been an awesome and heartbreaking ending (just like the actual ending, but more impactful) with the maid betraying the princess to save her brother